I. Summary

On March 18, 2007, Choles Ritchil, a leader of the indigenous Mandi tribe in Bangladesh, was arrested near his home by soldiers under the command of Maj. Tofique Elahi, and taken to an army camp. There, according to eyewitnesses, he was beaten with sticks, his genitals were squashed, and his fingernails and toenails were pulled out. His mutilated corpse was left at the local church the following day. A witness told Human Rights Watch:

His eyes had been plucked out and replaced with artificial "marble eyes." His testicles were smashed into pulp. Both arms were dislocated, the palms of both hands were smashed, the fingernails of the right hand had been removed, while the thumbnail on the left hand had also been removed. His fingers were broken… there were bruises and cuts all over the body especially on the back. The skin on the back appeared burnt and there were deep cuts under both knees, and nails missing from his toes.

The military-backed interim government, which took few steps to address abuses of this kind while in office during 2007 and 2008, attempted to appease Dhaka-based diplomats by setting up a one-member judicial investigation commission to look into Ritchil's death. The commissioner took statements from witnesses, relatives, and local activists. On June 10, 2007, Ritchil's body was exhumed and sent for an autopsy to Mymensingh Medical College Hospital. The autopsy report has not been made public. No one has been publicly prosecuted in connection with the case. The government has said that four army personnel were given disciplinary sanctions, including dismissal from service and denial of promotion, but it has made no details public, calling into question whether any action was actually taken. Even if it was, the punishment does not reflect the gravity of the crime.

Sadly, neither the killing of Ritchil nor the failure to prosecute is surprising. Instead, this horrific case is symptomatic of the pervasive culture of impunity in Bangladesh. There has been a lack of political will under successive governments to hold accountable those responsible for human rights violations. Of the thousands of killings of individuals in the custody of the security forces since independence in 1971, Human Rights Watch knows of very few cases that have resulted in a criminal conviction. The situation is not significantly different when it comes to other forms of human rights abuses, including torture, which is endemic in Bangladesh.

This report examines cases of extrajudicial killings, torture, "disappearances," and illegal detentions over the past decades in which, despite receiving public attention, impunity has prevailed. Many of the cases and issues discussed in this report have for years been repeatedly raised by Human Rights Watch and others. Unfortunately they remain as relevant as ever, especially as the legacy of the past two years of de facto military rule.

Impunity in Bangladesh was present at the country's birth. The 1971 war of independence was marked by atrocities on a massive scale committed against civilians, which are yet to be seriously addressed. Those who were initially detained and convicted for some of these abuses were shortly afterwards released. The scale and nature of the security forces' involvement in human rights abuses has since then varied over time, but the unwillingness of governments to hold these forces to account has been constant.

As a result, torture, killings in government custody, and other human rights violations by the police, armed forces, and the government's various paramilitary groups have become deep rooted problems. In recent years the Rapid Action Battalion (RAB) and the military intelligence outfit, the Directorate General of Forces Intelligence (DGFI), have emerged as symbols of abuse and impunity. RAB, an elite paramilitary force created in 2004 to address public outrage over violent crime, has allegedly been responsible for over 550 killings since it began operations. Human Rights Watch and others have long alleged that many of these deaths, often described as "crossfire killings," were actually extrajudicial executions of people taken into custody. The police soon adopted these same methods, and several hundred killings have been attributed to the force over the past few years.

Torture of detainees by state officials is routine. Detainees are subjected to severe beatings, sexual violence, electric shocks, having nails hammered into their toes, and being tied to poles and forced to stand for long periods of time. DGFI runs torture centers in the cantonment in Dhaka with purposely fitted rooms for torture. It has medical personnel on stand-by who can administer first aid and revive unconscious victims who can then be subjected to further ill-treatment.

Police and other security forces have used excessive and often deadly force to break up strikes and demonstrations. Arbitrary arrests on what appears to be flimsy evidence are common, as are politically motivated arrests.

After a state of emergency was declared on January 11, 2007-which lasted almost two years-and constitutionally guaranteed rights were suspended, Bangladesh's military-backed interim government headed by Chief Advisor Fakhruddin Ahmed acted with unprecedented force and determination to root out corruption and the influence of organized crime in electoral politics. Bangladesh acceded to the United Nations Convention against Corruption, and the Anti-Corruption Commission was made operational. More than 200 senior politicians, including two previous prime ministers, and leading businesspersons were arrested and detained. The interim government's stated intention was to transform the country's political culture into one that meets the requirements of a "healthy and stable democratic system" based on the rule of law.

While many Bangladeshis and members of the international community welcomed these goals, initial optimism turned to dismay when the corruption campaign led to routine illegal detentions, lack of due process, and torture to obtain confessions or implicate politicians. During this period the military was given law enforcement duties. Tens of thousands of people were detained, many illegally. Many detainees alleged they were tortured, and government forces were blamed for hundreds of extrajudicial killings. To achieve results in its effort to oust the previous political class and attack corruption, the interim government ignored the fundamental principle of the rule of law, which requires that those responsible for law enforcement are also bound by the very same laws.

Further, strong action against politicians and businesspersons accused of corruption was in sharp contrast to the interim government's complete inaction when it came to addressing allegations of illegal killings, torture, and other grave abuses committed by the armed forces, the police, and paramilitary law enforcement agencies. In particular, the DGFI was allowed free reign to persecute government or military critics through "disappearances," arbitrary detentions, and torture. Criticism of these abuses was met by the DGFI with threats, intimidation, and abuse.

Members of the security forces were, in effect, placed above the law in order to, ostensibly, fight corruption and ensure public order. Although in January 2008 the government instructed the security forces to put an end to deaths in custody, no one is known to have been prosecuted for any of the crimes committed, even though some cases, such as those of Choles Ritchil and journalist Tasneem Khalil, who was illegally detained and tortured by the DGFI, have received considerable national and international attention. In the rare cases where complaints were filed despite threats, violence, and bribes, and pressure led to announcements of official investigations, these efforts appeared to have been aimed at calming public outrage or ameliorating international concern instead of conducting serious inquiry that could serve as the basis for prosecutions of those who ordered or carried out abuses.

The internal justice and disciplinary systems of the military, RAB, and police have utterly failed to deliver justice. Although these institutions have claimed that in some cases their personnel have been punished, details are not made publicly available. There is every indication, however, that the sanctions handed out to the perpetrators are wholly inadequate and stand in no relation to the gravity of the crimes committed. It should be noted that the United Nations Human Rights Committee has stated that separation from service or dismissal from the force in question is not a sufficient punishment for violations of human rights.

Sadly, the interim government that claimed a commitment to reform has left a legacy of deepening Bangladesh's longstanding impunity for human rights abuses. The failure of the interim government to make the protection of human rights and the end of impunity a central plank of its tenure-no matter how difficult it would have been to achieve results-has further complicated the prospects of finding a long-term solution to these problems.

Bangladesh's main political parties also have great responsibility for impunity. During the period of the interim government the parties found a new commitment to human rights. They began to raise human rights concerns when leading politicians and their associates became the target of the interim government's anti-corruption campaign. Some Bangladeshi activists criticized the parties for raising human rights concerns while in opposition after having been responsible for or having ignored abuses while in power. Some even went so far as to justify or ignore abuses on these grounds.

There was merit in the criticism directed at the political parties, as many of the same politicians had previously been responsible for abuses or, while in power, had been unwilling to hold the security forces accountable. Some failed to act in order to protect their subordinates, others out of fear of antagonizing the security forces, which they perceived as essential for protecting and furthering their political and economic interests. Concerns remain that the new government may fail to act for the same reasons.

Impunity in Bangladesh is also the result of an outdated legal framework under which law enforcement officers and members of the armed forces are shielded from prosecution. In violation of international legal standards, article 46 of Bangladesh's constitution empowers parliament to pass laws that provide immunity from prosecution to any state officer for any act done to maintain or restore order, and to lift any penalty, sentence, or punishment imposed. Soldiers and RAB officers are also protected from the civilian criminal justice system because the rules ensure that they are prosecuted only in internal courts by their peers through processes that lack any form of independence or impartiality. While the civilian courts have jurisdiction over cases involving police officers suspected of involvement in criminal activities, such officers are protected by section 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which requires explicit government approval for the prosecution of an officer purporting to act in his or her official capacity. Several other laws state that no legal action can be taken against a person who in good faith acts to implement any of its provisions.

For all of these reasons, senior law enforcement and military officers have never been under strong systemic pressure to ensure that soldiers, paramilitaries, or police officers operate within the law or human rights norms. They have come to take for granted that they have complete discretion in carrying out their mandate, even if it includes the use of unlawful violence. Secure in their impunity, they send the message to victims that anyone who attempts to hold them accountable will have to pay a high price and that, in any case, their efforts will be fruitless.

The December 2008 elections ended two years of military-backed rule. The Awami League and its allies won a massive majority. Prime Minister Sheikh Hasina Wazed's government now has a unique opportunity and responsibility to address major human rights problems that have been ignored by successive governments. It is a chance that must not be missed.

The new government has stated that it has a policy of zero tolerance for extrajudicial killings, torture, and deaths in custody. However, there is credible evidence that several members of the country's border security force, the Bangladesh Rifles, were tortured to death by the army following their detention as suspects in an apparent mutiny that took place in February 2009 and left more than 70 people dead.

Bangladesh's new government will only be successful in ensuring a stable democratic system based on the rule of law if it fully abides by the constitutional provision that "all citizens are equal before the law and are entitled to equal protection of law." Politicians who campaigned for the restoration of democracy must make it a top priority to ensure that allegations of human rights violations are rapidly, thoroughly, and impartially investigated. Laws that shield military and law enforcement officers accused of violations of human rights from being prosecuted and tried in a transparent manner should be repealed quickly. The civilian criminal justice system must be supported and protected so that it can exercise its jurisdiction over abuses committed by the military, RAB, and police.

Bangladesh's new government must make it a top priority to address these problems and ensure that it lives up to its constitutional responsibilities and its obligations under international human rights law.

Key Recommendations

• Take all necessary measures to put an end to the security forces' involvement in extrajudicial executions, acts of torture, and other abuses of human rights. Address impunity by ensuring that all human rights violations are thoroughly investigated and that those responsible, regardless of rank and political affiliation, are prosecuted and brought to justice.
• Disband RAB, which has since its inception based its operating culture on practices such as extrajudicial killings. In the event RAB is retained, establish an independent commission to assess RAB's performance, and to identify those believed to be responsible for serious violations such as extrajudicial killings who should be excluded from a reformed RAB and prosecuted. The independent commission should also develop and implement an action plan to transform RAB into an agency that operates within the law and with full respect for international human rights norms.
• Disband DGFI, which has too long depended on illegal practices such as arbitrary detentions and torture. In the event that DGFI is retained, establish an independent commission to assess DGFI's performance, identify those believed to be responsible for serious violations such as torture who should be excluded from a reformed DGFI and prosecuted, and develop and implement an action plan to transform DGFI into an agency that operates within the law and with full respect for international human rights norms. DGFI's operations should be strictly limited to lawful military intelligence activities, and in no circumstances should it engage in surveillance of the political opposition and critics of the regime.
• Amend the military legislation currently in force and the Armed Police Battalion Ordinance to ensure that members of the armed forces and RAB involved in violations of human rights are tried in the civilian criminal justice system.
• Amend all legal provisions, such as articles 132 and 197 of the Criminal Procedure Code, which in effect shield law enforcement officials from being held to account for violations of human rights.

Methodology

This report is based on Human Right Watch interviews with victims, witnesses, human rights defenders, and key informants conducted in 2006, 2007, and 2008. Further material was gathered through telephone interviews and electronic mail. The report makes extensive use of fact-finding reports prepared by nongovernmental organizations in Bangladesh, including Odhikar, Ain O Salish Kendra (ASK), and Hotline Bangladesh. Other written materials we assessed included academic literature, press reports, and reports produced by international nongovernmental organizations, the United Nations special procedure mandate holders, and foreign governments. Laws passed before 1985 we reviewed in their official English version. For more recently adopted laws, for which no official English versions exist, we used unofficial translations.

In June 2008, when research for this report was ongoing, Human Rights Watch requested visas for a three-person delegation to visit Bangladesh to, among other things, discuss issues of relevance for the report with the interim government and Bangladesh's security forces. We were informed that the delegation would not be permitted to visit the country at that time. In July 2008, we consequently sent a letter to Chief Advisor Fakhruddin Ahmed and the heads of various security forces requesting information about the status of investigations into specific cases raised in the report. At this writing, no reply has been received to this letter.